Appeal No. 94-3575
Application 07/929,044
unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Sablotsky and
Petereit; and
(2) Whether the examiner erred in finally rejecting claims
10 and 20 under 35 USC § 103 as unpatentable over the combined
disclosures of Sablotsky, Petereit, and Song.
DELIBERATIONS
Our deliberations in this matter have included evaluation
and review of the following materials:
(1) The instant specification, including all of the claims
on appeal;
(2) Appellants’ main Brief and Reply Brief before the Board;
(3) The Examiner’s Answer and the communication mailed by
the examiner September 13, 1994; and
(4) The above-cited references relied on by the examiner.
On consideration of the record, including the above-listed
materials, we reverse the examiner’s prior art rejections.
DISCUSSION
As recited in independent claim 1, appellants’ transdermal
therapeutic formulation contains 5 to 100 weight parts of a C -C
2 3
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007